FOR RELEASE: May 6, 2005

Speaker sometimes deviates from text.

Thank you Richard Whitmire for that introduction. And thanks to Lisa for organizing this event and being flexible with my schedule. Thank you all for having me here today.

Believe it or not, I used to be one of you. Or at least I aspired to be. Back in college, at the University of Houston, I took a fair share of journalism classes, and in fact, I think I may have even had enough credits for a minor in it. I had dreams of one day going off and being an enterprising reporter, covering government. But the "beat" I was assigned was to cover campus security. Following cops around investigating stolen backpacks was not my cup of tea. Many of you, I'm sure, suffered through those first beats and probably wrote a few obits and covered a dog show or two on your way to where you are today. Whatever the path, I am glad you are here covering education!

Covering education policy over the last few years must have been very interesting. Being a part of it from my end certainly has been. Over the past few months, there has been no shortage of drama. I'm glad that we could keep you all busy.

Why was I initially interested in journalism? I think for the same reason you all were. I wanted to go out and "make the world a better place." Trite but true. Instead, I am working toward that goal through the policy arena.

Like those of us who work in the policy world, you have a tough job because almost everyone thinks he or she is an expert on the topic of education. After all, everyone went to school, has children or nieces or nephews in school, and knows a teacher or two. On the other hand, I would think it is satisfying to report on something that most people can relate to—and something that is fundamentally so important to our country. I am deeply respectful of the work you all do to inform the public objectively about the world outside their doors. And I want to make sure that our nation produces educated readers of your newspapers and magazines. If we fail to do that, not only will we suffer morally, civically and economically, some of you might be out of a job! And we wouldn't want that now, would we?

On a side note, I am a bit of a news "junkie." Not only do I read at least three national newspapers in the morning to start off my day. I also read clips—a lot of stories many reporters in this room write.

In all seriousness, I believe that we are facing a defining moment in our nation's history. Are we really serious about educating every child in America?

The vast majority of us are. And that means we have shed some old attitudes and behaviors, confronted the truth, rolled up our sleeves, and gotten down to work.

To hear some tell it, reform is more trouble than it's worth. I recently read a letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal that disturbed me.

It said that Congress and the administration put "a burdensome cart (the unfortunate with disabilities) before the horse (the exceptionally talented) that must pull the nation forward."

Outrageous. Unbelievable.

I stand here today to re-affirm that all children deserve a high-quality education. That may be contrary to some "self-interested" people who aren't as interested in the children who need help—whether they are disabled, English learners, products of disadvantaged or broken families—unless, of course, the child is theirs.

We must give them all a chance. It is the moral imperative of the 21st century. And happily, there are plenty of people who agree.

For example, Dayle Timmons, Florida's 2004 Teacher of the Year, said that No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is "one of the most exciting pieces of legislation to come down the pike for special education students. ... We don't yet know what our children have the capacity to do. So I am very excited that No Child Left Behind says ... they count, they mean something, they are important. And, they are children that we cannot leave behind."

Never before in the 229-year history of our nation has the United States made a promise to provide all children with a high-quality education. Think about that for a second.

You've covered the studies showing that for too many students, a high school diploma has become little more than a "certificate of attendance." Millions of children have been given a seat in the classroom but not a meaningful and useful education.

The Brown v. Board of Education decision guaranteed that seat. But it clearly wasn't enough. Nor was the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act, or ESEA, now 40 years old. It wasn't until 2001, with the passage of No Child Left Behind, that we as a nation finally took a good, long look in the mirror and said enough is enough. The achievement gap must be addressed. Student achievement comes first. Results matter.

Like you, most of your readers were blessed with good educations. That's why they're your readers! They, and you, must fight the urge to take education for granted. How do you explain in lay terms what the achievement gap is to those on the losing end of it? One way is to say nearly half of minority students graduate from high school lacking even basic reading skills—that is, if they don't drop out first. At current rates, only about half of African-American males will attend some college, compared to one-third of all African-Americans who are likely to spend some time in prison.

How can you make your readers believe that the achievement gap affects them? Our nation's leadership position in the world is being challenged. For example, 38 percent of bachelor's degrees in China were awarded in engineering as opposed to less than 6 percent in the U.S. And in the decade from 1990 to 2000, India increased its number of students enrolled in college by 92 percent.

Intel CEO Craig Barrett has noted that 2.5 billion people have joined the world market, with China, India and Russia in the World Trade Organization. Even if only 10 percent of them are highly educated, that still means 250 million new competitors that our country will face. According to Thomas Friedman's book, The World Is Flat, as of 2000 nearly 40 percent of scientists and engineers with PhDs in the U.S. labor force were foreign born. Meanwhile, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology reports that students in this country lose interest in science and math as they advance through the educational system.

We must turn this around. I am optimistic after seeing the nation's governors and respected business leaders, such as Bill Gates, come together and call for reform of our nation's high schools. It's urgently needed, and it's something in which the president and I strongly believe.

We can sit here and talk about the entire alphabet soup of education policy: NAEP, MCAS, UPASS, MAEP, FCAT, and AYP, HQT, LEP, etc. But the bottom line is simple—and urgent. Research tells us that once a child starts to slip, in the early grades, it is extremely difficult for him or her to catch up. Research tells us that if a child can't read by third grade, he or she may never catch up.

That's why we must be serious about education reform. No more excuses.

That's why the stars aligned in Washington three years ago—which doesn't happen often. Parents demanded meaningful accountability and transparency; taxpayers demanded value for their money; businesses understood the need for better-educated employees to stay competitive in the global marketplace; and children stuck in poor-performing schools desperately needed a chance. The message was heard at the highest levels of government and on both sides of the partisan aisle. And the No Child Left Behind law was born.

In just three years, much has been accomplished. All 50 states, including, I would add, those now challenging the law, have accountability plans in place that have laid the foundation for continuous school improvement and real student achievement.

These state plans may not sound like a big deal, but believe me, they are. For 40 years, nobody really paid much attention to the ESEA—either at the state or federal level. And the federal dollars flowed, regardless.

It wasn't meant to be this way. Senator Robert F. Kennedy said, "I want to change this bill because it doesn't have any way of measuring those educators. ... We really ought to have some evaluation in there, and some measurement as to whether any good is happening."

Senator Kennedy was right. And the other Senator Kennedy was right in supporting NCLB three years ago. It took 40 years, but I think we finally do have the measurement piece of the puzzle that Robert F. Kennedy pushed for.

Evaluation is one side of the coin; enforcement is the other. That's why the Department of Education recently withheld funds from a certain large state in the Southwest. It's the third time funds have been withheld from a state under No Child Left Behind. But not just because we care about compliance. Because we care most about the children in the schools. We also care that too many special education students are taking low-level tests, and we are working with Texas to address that issue.

Do I enjoy withholding funds? Of course not. I would much prefer that states follow NCLB because it ultimately helps children, as does the funding that comes with it.

It's not just about compliance with "the Feds." It's about the consequences for the kids if we looked the other way.

Is national school reform easy? No, nobody ever said it would be. But this law is here to stay. I am a mom with two kids; I have likened this law to a third child (much to my own daughters' chagrin). The law is now about three years old. In other words, we've all just survived the "terrible twos." Some people are still experiencing what I would call "growing pains."

A few states in particular are testing the waters, seeing how far they can go without losing federal funds. Utah recently passed a bill, which the governor signed this week, that may conflict with NCLB. But I would hope that the state's taxpayers understand all the facts:

• Utah has one of the largest achievement gaps in the nation. Hispanic fourth- graders perform in the bottom tier of all Hispanics in the country on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). And looking at the state's own data we find that the achievement gap grows wider as time goes on.

• And Utah stands to lose more than $76 million in federal funds—dollars aimed directly at Utah's neediest children.

We live in a republic (small R) and I believe in states' rights, as most Republicans (big R) like me do. NCLB is a partnership between the states and the federal government. So if Utah's legislators believe that this is the right move, they must explain their actions to the state's Hispanic parents and taxpayers. They will have to tell them why they refused the federal government's "stinking money," as one Utah legislator put it.

Another state, Connecticut, has also been in the news lately. This state has threatened a lawsuit so they can continue to receive federal dollars for annual student testing and other parts of the law, without actually testing all their students every year. I don't know about you, but when it comes to my kids, I want to see the progress they're making every year. I wouldn't want to skip a year before hearing how things are going. It just doesn't make sense.

Like Utah, Connecticut has a ways to go. Let's look at Connecticut's achievement data up close. The state's African-American fourth-graders scored 37 points lower than white students in reading and 32 points lower in math, according to the 2003 NAEP. The '03-04 Connecticut Mastery Test found that 88 percent of white eighth-graders were proficient or advanced in those subjects, with the range for Hispanic and African-American eighth-graders at 48 to 53 percent.

There are places where the achievement gap is shrinking in Connecticut. For example, Amistad Academy Charter School, which the New Haven Register called "'no child left behind' in action," is achieving impressive results for its students. 97 percent of Amistad's students are African-American or Hispanic. Upon entering the school in fifth grade, students are typically two years below grade level in reading and math. But with hard work and long hours, they are proving it can be done. Amistad students are either equaling or surpassing scores in many of Connecticut's more affluent towns, such as Greenwich and Madison.

These are the kids whom NCLB is designed to help. Because of the annual measurement and disaggregation of data, we know who needs help. I like to say that what gets measured gets done. The question is why any policy-maker wouldn't want that kind of data and information.

It's true that in the past, some states have chosen not to take part in federal education programs. New Mexico opted out of what is now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for six years when the "IDEA" was new. As a result, the state forfeited some $23 million in federal funds for its disabled children. And five states initially chose not to participate in Goals 2000 a decade ago.

We want states to see No Child Left Behind as a partnership—one that enables them to take the lead on reform, to renew the spirit of federalism that guides education. Last month, I announced a new common-sense approach to the implementation of No Child Left Behind, allowing flexibility where possible and necessary. But this approach is conditioned upon ensuring that real annual progress is made toward getting every single child to read and do math at grade level. The only way to achieve that goal is to adhere to the law's bright lines of annual testing and breaking down data by student subgroups.

Next week, the Department will release guidance that spells out how this new policy will work, such as what information states will need to submit to the Department to take advantage of some of the new flexibility. I look forward to working with them on this sensible approach. It's about children and what's best for them.

I believe that Connecticut, Utah and Texas genuinely want to do right by their kids. And I sincerely hope we can work out our differences. But for every one of these states in the news, there are dozens of others that are quietly going about their business, implementing the law, and getting results. Please focus on them once in a while, too.

For example, Louisiana has done the hard work of scrapping its out of level assessments in order to raise standards for students with disabilities. Wyoming has set robust and rigorous Adequate Yearly Progress targets. Massachusetts, Maryland and Pennsylvania did a great job aligning their assessment systems with the new law—a sometimes tricky business. Florida, Michigan, Alabama, West Virginia and Washington are seamlessly integrating Reading First into their curricula. Programs like Nebraska's STARS assessment system and the Mississippi Teacher Center are helping school districts hire, train and retain the highly qualified teachers our kids so urgently need, as the law requires.

The list goes on and on. And the work is paying off. In states such as: North Carolina, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Georgia, Illinois and New Mexico, to name just a few, students are achieving and the gap is closing.

So, we have the vast majority of states quietly working to get the job done. And we have a few states that are loudly protesting. And a lawsuit from one union.

I really wouldn't call that a "rebellion." The bulk of states are hard at work, helping students achieve. That's the story: It's a "quiet revolution" of accountability and higher standards. An underreported revolution, I would add. "Man bites dog."

Look at the union lawsuit closely. Not one state has joined. And only a handful or two of the National Education Association's (NEA) affiliates have joined the suit.

Many op-ed writers and columnists have questioned the wisdom of the NEA's lawsuit. I am named in the lawsuit, so the lawyers don't want me talking very much. So instead, I will quote others.

New York Times editorial board writer Brent Staples said the law "happens to be the best hope for guaranteeing black and Latino children a chance at equal education. ... Unless the civil rights establishment adopts a stronger and more public position, it will inevitably be viewed as having missed the most important civil rights battle of the last half-century."

And the Chicago Tribune's public editor Don Wycliff agreed in a column that "[Staples] is dead-on right, and I hope the civil rights establishment—they know who they are—and all other opponents of No Child Left Behind will take his message to heart. For the children's sake."

The money argument is a red herring. Several independent studies have found that funding is indeed adequate to implement NCLB. In addition, the Government Accountability Office has said that because NCLB is a voluntary program that comes with conditions attached to the receipt of funds, it is not a federal mandate under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Some of the objections to the law have focused on the testing provisions. But most states already have the testing infrastructure in place—and the bipartisan passage of the law was accompanied with a significant increase in federal spending for that purpose. Over the past four years, federal funding under NCLB has increased 40 percent. Funding for K-12 overall has increased 37 percent. Furthermore, looking only at Title I funds for disadvantaged students, funding has increased 45 percent. And, of course, as a nation we are spending an estimated $536 billion this year for K-12 education, which is more than the Gross Domestic Product of Russia.

The old way of measuring progress—by dollars spent—doesn't cut it anymore. We must measure it by children learning. Period. And we are. NCLB forces all of us—schools, states and Washington—to focus on how we spend the money—on outputs and results. I believe the nation that provides the most educational opportunity will be the one that leads the world in the Information Age. There is simply no excuse for this achievement gap to persist as it has. It is not OK for our great country to leave any children behind.

To summarize: the contrary actions of a couple of states and one union do not constitute a "grass-roots rebellion." The bottom line is that most respected, national education organizations are working with us to continue the unprecedented national progress that No Child Left Behind has begun. So are most states, the 15,000 school districts and the 96,000 schools across the nation. I will continue to partner with them and look forward to the day when all education will focus on helping society's most vulnerable children receive the education that a nation such as ours is capable of providing.

Let me make one more point. Nowhere in this law do the words "failing school" appear. Yet this anxiety-provoking term is commonly used in headlines and in the bodies of your stories. Instead, we believe—and the law says—those schools are "in need of improvement," the term actually used in the law. And if, after years of poor performance, such a school is now measuring its children yearly, breaking down scores by student groups, providing extra attention where needed, and giving parents timely and accurate information, then it is not failing its children. It has taken the first steps to getting on the right track, and student achievement should soon follow.

Every organization can stand to improve, and every one of us can use a little improvement. That's certainly true in a nation where for every 100 17-year-olds, only 72 high school diplomas are awarded every year.

Another word that I think needs to be used carefully is "sanctions." Giving a child in an underperforming school the opportunity to transfer or to get targeted academic help in the form of free tutoring is not a "sanction." And I know that word will pop up more frequently as this law matures because NCLB calls for the state to intervene by helping children stuck in those schools, in the form of professional development, technical assistance, curriculum reassessment, etc. Again, I don't think that those are "sanctions."

I've been in this job a little over 100 days now. I've had to deal with cartoon bunnies and internal investigations, policy pronouncements on implementation of NCLB, and trying to push high school reform as the next logical step. It has not been dull!

But I try not to let the day-to-day noise drown out the quiet truth: that every day I walk into the office, I can do something to help someone, somewhere get a quality education.

Why did you go into journalism? My guess is that it was to right the wrongs in the world by drawing attention to them, to shine light on the problems in our society that have kept us from moving forward. And this law shines all kinds of light on our great national challenge—an achievement gap that is simply unconscionable and a system that all too often puts the needs of the adults over the needs of the kids. You also probably wanted to help the "little guy."

President Bush and I are pushing this civil rights issue to the national forefront. We have some allies, but not nearly enough. I know there are others out there who believe that this is the right thing to do.

Shortly after the Utah legislature passed its bill, Jim Martin, a brave fourth-grade teacher from Salt Lake wrote an op-ed that appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune. In it, he urged some introspection.

He wrote: "The disparity between students of color and their white peers is astonishing, to say the least, and if the federal government forces us to recognize this somber fact ... we all must admit that an achievement gap exists. We must all admit that this achievement gap is conspicuously drawn along racial lines. And we must all admit that it has everything to do with race. It has become virtually invisible, except to the people of color who live with it every day. On the other hand, the evidence is right in front of our faces. It is practically screaming for our attention."

We know that all children can learn if given a chance. No Child Left Behind gives all children that chance—children in Mr. Martin's class and in classrooms all across America. These educators believe in their students, and I do, too. I know you do as well.

So allow me to thank you for doing what you do—informing citizens about education policy at the local, state, and federal level. You perform a very important service and play an extremely important role in our society. I respect and thank you for your work and look forward to working with you all in the months and years ahead.

Thank you.

####